much more than just google. How about 10 or 20000 scanners, all archiving files without drm ? could regular libraries be trusted to do it and backup the digital files redundantly ? If microsoft was doing the same, would it become ok with or without drm ?

Microsoft isn't doing it, and Microsoft won't do it, because they value IP.

And if you're suggesting that I can "trust" Google more than, say, the MIT Media Lab... well... let's just say I'll need a five minute break to finish laughing.

Omniusovermind, stop making references to conspiracy theories. Everyone on Internet forums knows that there's no corruption or dirty backroom dealing going on in government and big businesses. You're such a naive tinfoil hat wearing wackjob.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. Bing is available on all browsers. . . unlike Gmaps! Touché!

Comparing Google to an irresponsible child is actually quite fitting. Unfortunately it doesn't excuse Google. It's no different to claiming it's ok to let yourself into a strangers home, if they have failed to lock their door at night.

I have to say, I'm quite bemused by your blind loyalty towards Google throughout this conversation. What is the source of this reasoning?

It was a joke. I have no loyalty to google, or microsoft, or apple. I like some of their products. That's where it ends. The jealousy and irony of time passing and who is evil this week is hilarious, though.

Much ado about nothing anyway. Google tried to trim the fat by cutting down on all the mobile browser formats they needed to support and we're probably just hoping nobody would get upset over it. When they did, they said they're going to fix it. Companies do stuff like this all the time.

I still say if google wants to block services to WP, Microsoft should block all forms of google on all of their services. That means that customers with any version of windows no longer have access to gmail, google maps, youtube, or google.com.

I still say if google wants to block services to WP, Microsoft should block all forms of google on all of their services. That means that customers with any version of windows no longer have access to gmail, google maps, youtube, or google.com.

I still say if google wants to block services to WP, Microsoft should block all forms of google on all of their services. That means that customers with any version of windows no longer have access to gmail, google maps, youtube, or google.com.

Lets see who cracks first.

Shawn

Mmm, that would be a very, very bad idea, on many different fronts. Not to mention impossible, illegal, and incredibly pointless to even consider.

They're a great IT citizen. They support their Outlook.com users and other users on every OS under the sun.

Microsoft should point out that its open, cross-platform solutions are superior in usability and functionality to Google's closed, proprietary services -- and are available cross-platform.

Microsoft is once again the "safe" choice -- if you have a Windows Phone and PC now, but decide to go, say, BlackBerry 10 and iMac, your Outlook, SkyDrive and everything else will work with those platforms as well. Google is the dangerous, unreliable choice -- if you have Android, but decide to go, say, Windows Phone and iPad, your Google Services will degrade (or may stop working entirely). Or they might work okay until Google decides to make another spontaneous change that breaks everything.

They're a great IT citizen. They support their Outlook.com users and other users on every OS under the sun.

Microsoft should point out that its open, cross-platform solutions are superior in usability and functionality to Google's closed, proprietary services -- and are available cross-platform.

Microsoft is once again the "safe" choice -- if you have a Windows Phone and PC now, but decide to go, say, BlackBerry 10 and iMac, your Outlook, SkyDrive and everything else will work with those platforms as well. Google is the dangerous, unreliable choice -- if you have Android, but decide to go, say, Windows Phone and iPad, your Google Services will degrade (or may stop working entirely). Or they might work okay until Google decides to make another spontaneous change that breaks everything.

Outlook works great on the Mac, and Microsoft supports its customers across all OSes. The "predatory" stuff is meaningless rhetoric without any concrete basis whatsoever, used to justify Google's anticompetitive behavior as "retaliatory" when it is clearly unilateral.

There's a great client for Outlook.com that runs on every modern Mac, and extends the capabilities of the Mac greatly once it's installed. It's called "Microsoft Windows."

the point of buying a mac is to use the Mac OS which I believe is the best desktop experience.

I don't want to pay for windows to buy outlook 2010, then download outlook connector. I already own Microsoft office 2011 for the MAC. I hope that Microsoft lets hotmail work with the MAC, as it does on iPad and iPhone..
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express

Outlook works great on the Mac, and Microsoft supports its customers across all OSes. The "predatory" stuff is meaningless rhetoric without any concrete basis whatsoever, used to justify Google's anticompetitive behavior as "retaliatory" when it is clearly unilateral.

I never mentioned Google, so that likely means that I was calling out a bull**** statement and not trying to justify anything. I know that you think I "care" about Google, or that I'm "concerned" about what people say about them, but that's not it at all. You're full of it, and I enjoy telling you that.

If you think that calling Microsoft predatory is rhetoric, you were never paying attention. Bing it. Or maybe Google it in case Microsoft is blocking it.

And no, Outlook.com CANNOT be set up as an Exchange account in Outlook for Mac. Therefore, Microsoft is NOT supporting me like they do users of their own OS.

I never mentioned Google, so that likely means that I was calling out a bull**** statement and not trying to justify anything.

I salute your innovation -- calling out a "BS statement" with one that is even MORE BS. ;)

If you think that calling Microsoft predatory is rhetoric, you were never paying attention. Bing it. Or maybe Google it in case Microsoft is blocking it.

I'm quite aware that I can get rhetoric from Binging it, too. Just like I can get extensive documentations of "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, the imminent destruction of the Earth at the hands of Planet Nubiru, and the "war on Christmas" from FOX "News."

And no, Outlook.com CANNOT be set up as an Exchange account in Outlook for Mac.

It works great as a web service. I use it that way, even on my Windows 8 machines.

Therefore, Microsoft is NOT supporting me like they do users of their own OS.

Baloney. They're providing the Outlook.com UI to everyone, across browsers -- unlike, say, your friends at Google. Or the time that predatory music monopolist Apple issued multiple updates to iTunes designed to "make the Palm Pre integration break" -- something that Microsoft would never do (but that I'm sure you supported).

You've got to get over your irrational hatred of Microsoft. It's the 21st century, and they're now the friendliest and most interoperable company out there. Most of the accusations of "monopoly" came not from Microsoft being "aggressive," but the competition (especially Apple products) sucking and costing more.

And yeah, I know, because I was a Mac guy for about a decade before dumping the platform and moving to Windows. Consumers aren't stupid -- they choose the best value. It wasn't Apple, Sun, Netscape or the other IT losers of the 1990s who were providing that.

I'm quite aware that I can get rhetoric from Binging it, too. Just like I can get extensive documentations of "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, the imminent destruction of the Earth at the hands of Planet Nubiru, and the "war on Christmas" from FOX "News."

Seriously, you aren't hooked up right. I have no idea what that even says, but if it makes sense to you I think that's great.

Originally Posted by brmiller1976

It works great as a web service. I use it that way, even on my Windows 8 machines.

but your entire point has been about how open EAS is, how it's available on all devices. Now you're saying that I should be using the browser because Microsoft doesn't support their own EAS with their own webmail service with their own email app on a competing desktop OS. You are full of it.

I don't know what Google has to do with the fact that not even Microsoft supports their own EAS for their own webmail service in their own email app. You've been all about EAS and how evil Google is for dropping it, now you're doing an about face and saying that the browser is where it's at. Microsoft doesn't fully support EAS either.

Originally Posted by brmiller1976

Or the time that predatory music monopolist Apple issued multiple updates to iTunes designed to "make the Palm Pre integration break" -- something that Microsoft would never do (but that I'm sure you supported).

I had a Palm Pre at the time. I don't care what you're sure of, that has nothing to do with this topic.

But Microsoft DID do something similar, only worse. Did you hear about what they did to their Plays for Sure partners? These weren't companies that were trying to ride Microsoft's coat tails, those companies were "partners". Until Plays for Sure got in the way of the Zune.

So, instead of chopping off one disinterested company like Apple did to Palm, Microsoft chopped 6 or 8 companies that invested time and money into a Microsoft DRM scheme at the knees to clear the MP3 player deck for the ill-fated Zune. Seems pretty predatory to me.

Originally Posted by brmiller1976

You've got to get over your irrational hatred of Microsoft.......

I'd like to tell you that I read all of your ramblings here, but I didn't. If I had "irrational hatred" for Microsoft, I wouldn't own a Windows Phone right this very second.